MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Understanding ecosystem dynamics for conservation of biota

2006· article· en· W2137670480 on OpenAlexaff
A. R. E. Sinclair, Andrea E. Byrom

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Ecology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersFrancis Crick Institute
KeywordsBiotaEcosystemEcologyDisturbance (geology)BiodiversityEcosystem engineerBiologyEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1. Ecosystems have higher-order emerging properties that can affect the conservation of species. We identify some of these properties in order to facilitate a better understanding of them. 2. Nonlinear, indirect effects of food web interactions among species can produce counterintuitive changes in populations. 3. Species differ in their roles and linkages with other species in the system. These roles are a property of the system. Such differences in roles influence how we conserve individual species. 4. Ecosystems operate at a multitude of interacting spatial and temporal scales, which together structure the system and affect the dynamics of individual populations. 5. Disturbance also structures an ecosystem, producing both long-term slow changes and sudden shifts in ecosystem dynamics. 6. Ecosystems therefore can have multiple states, determined both by disturbance regimes and biotic interactions. Conservation should recognize a possible multiplicity of natural states while avoiding aberrant (human-induced) states. 7. Ecosystem processes are influenced by the composition of the biota they contain. Disturbances to the biota can distort processes and functions, which in turn can endanger individual species. 8. The goal of ecosystem conservation is the long-term persistence of the biota in the system. There are two paradigms: community-based conservation (CBC) and protected area conservation. Both have their advantages but neither is sufficient to protect the biota on its own. 9. CBC is required to conserve the majority of the world's biota not included in protected areas. However, current CBC methods favour a few idiosyncratic species, distort the species complex, and ignore the majority. More comprehensive methods are required for this approach to meet the goal of ecosystem conservation. 10. Protected areas are essential to conserve species unable to coexist with humans. They also function as ecological baselines to monitor the effects of humans on their own ecosystems. 11. However, protected areas suffer from loss of habitat through attrition of critical areas. Thus, renewal (addition) of habitat is required in order to achieve the long-term persistence of biota in functioning ecosystems. Identification of minimum habitat areas and restoration of ecosystems become two major priorities for future research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations124
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal EcologySame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207